T206 Titus and Bliss *cancelled*

[dougscats]

I'm most often reserved these days, but the ethics and the dilemma are so basic in this case that I want to weigh in.

[To think or to act?]

Usually, I think something over before I bid, but this is a case where one has to bid before deliberating, else the item might be sold to someone else first. Thinking it over will have to come later.

[To make a steal?]

Many [most?] of us love the idea of getting a "steal."
But of course anytime a steal is made someone is being stolen from.
Using the term steal may be unfair, but the point is that whenever we make a great deal someone else is paying, more or less.

[In principle, does a buyer have any responsibility to a seller?]

Surely, a seller has many responsibilities to potential buyers [full disclosure, etc.]. Does it work the other way as well? I do think that Net54 is different than Ebay, even as the auctions and the membership are different. Whatever the answer, a buyer's responsibility here is something that might be thought over after bidding.
There are idealists who might well counter that one's first resonse should be to inform the seller of the actual value and warn him not to sell. But, I'd maintain that on a Net54 auction, "I'll take it" is fastest, and one can be the idealist he wants to be after he wins.

Finally, in this case, what is the fair solution?
After some thought, I thought a 50-50% compromise would be fair.
But now I'm not so sure. I know that I feel better when I do the right thing [that's me, still the pragmatist even when being principled, a cynical idealist].

I do feel that Todd has been shortchanged. I don't know how he feels, but even someone who willingly returns a wallet is usually rewarded, no?